From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Date: Tue,  2 Feb 2016 19:48:13 -0500
From: Kurt H Maier <khm@sciops.net>
To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net>
Message-ID: <20160203004813.GA69402@wopr.sciops.net>
References: <CANUoZoEo1VDp8r2gx=569e48uL_TFCaBvHRhmi2zX-4oa3cA0g@mail.gmail.com>
	<e8c8e5a005b5f6ba25f9364fa2860e6b@proxima.alt.za>
	<CAJSxfmJ9L6NZbY4=6zErF83-yBEwXJZeb1N4vYNBzXEP1Lmexw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJSxfm+6OxwEujFRmhC8503fC2ivBwpp48Opuw740iyBQWQ7iA@mail.gmail.com>
	<1b157c8bb44aec67c1446c45563889e9@ghost.attlocal.net>
	<56B14BE0.2040000@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <56B14BE0.2040000@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [9fans] rc exec error behaviour
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 8205885e-ead9-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

On Tue, Feb 02, 2016 at 06:37:52PM -0600, Sean Hinchee wrote:
> Go 1.5.1 built and is running on 9Front/amd64 I thought, but doesn't on
> 9Front/386?

That's correct, but the actual point is that it's still full of weird
bugs and is not 100% functional, even after it builds.  Doesn't stop
some good software from working, but it's not like Go on Plan 9 is
reliable.

khm